The US Elections and the Gaza War
Al-Ittihad, UAE, October 25
Will the recent killing of Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar in northern Gaza pave the way for a political breakthrough in the ongoing conflict in the region? Some optimists suggest that this development might ease the path toward negotiating a cease-fire, facilitating the mutual release of hostages, and initiating discussions on Gaza’s reconstruction. Against the backdrop of relentless terrorism and Israeli airstrikes, the demand for a compromise has reached a critical point. However, there are several reasons for a more skeptical outlook in the short term. Key figures within Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s coalition are opposed to a cease-fire, as are some remaining members of Hamas. On Monday, October 21, right-wing Israeli activists organized a rally advocating for the construction of new Jewish settlements in Gaza. This rally featured members of Netanyahu’s governing coalition, including National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir and Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich. The event called not only for settlements but for the expulsion of the entire Palestinian population. Although this group represents a minority and does not reflect the stance of the Israeli government or the majority of Israelis, its refusal to make concessions to the Palestinians poses a threat to the stability of Netanyahu’s coalition. This hard-line faction could withdraw support at any moment, potentially triggering new elections that Netanyahu risks losing. Such a political shift would expose him to legal jeopardy due to previous charges he faces in Israeli courts. Furthermore, significant obstacles emerge from other stakeholders who may be averse to an early conclusion of the hostilities. A cease-fire would compel Lebanese Hezbollah to consider an agreement with Israel, aiming to end the ongoing conflict and repeated Israeli strikes on Lebanon. In such a scenario, Hezbollah, Iran’s primary proxy, might be less inclined to initiate large-scale attacks on Israel if Iran were to enter a direct confrontation. Moreover, a peace process involving Israel, the Palestinians, key Arab states, and the United States could unsettle certain regional actors opposed to peace, as well as international players who might benefit from the US being ensnared in a prolonged conflict in the Middle East. Achieving a cease-fire in Gaza would mark a notable triumph for Biden-Harris diplomacy, diminishing the potential for renewed regional violence and turmoil in the energy markets ahead of the US elections. Given Netanyahu’s strained relations with the Biden Administration and his aspirations for a Trump presidency, he is unlikely to provide Kamala Harris with a favorable “October surprise.” It seems probable that a cease-fire will only be brokered after the US election results are finalized. The president-elect, whether Harris or Trump, will likely be driven to end the violence and possess significant influence to pressure both parties once it is clear who will direct US security policy for the forthcoming four years. Should Trump emerge victorious, he would seek to swiftly prove his capability to effect change, distinguishing himself from President Biden, and would be keen to avoid a prolonged crisis at the outset of his term. His positive rapport with Netanyahu may enhance his diplomatic efforts. Conversely, should Harris win, it would present a challenge for Netanyahu, who would face pressure to resolve the crisis and engage in dialogue with the Palestinians. Harris, like Trump, is averse to being embroiled in further conflicts, and her fresh mandate would enable her to exert more decisive pressure on Netanyahu than President Biden has been prepared to apply. —Geoffrey Kemp (translated by Asaf Zilberfarb)
This holiday season, give to:
Truth and understanding
The Media Line's intrepid correspondents are in Israel, Gaza, Lebanon, Syria and Pakistan providing first-person reporting.
They all said they cover it.
We see it.
We report with just one agenda: the truth.
